4.1 Article

Mitotic and polytene chromosomes analysis of the oriental fruit fly, Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Journal

GENETICA
Volume 139, Issue 1, Pages 79-90

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10709-010-9495-3

Keywords

Bactrocera dorsalis; Polytene chromosomes; Mitotic chromosomes; Chromosome inversions; Diptera; Tephritidae

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Oriental fruit fly, Batrocera dorsalis s.s. (Hendel) is one of the most destructive agricultural pests, belonging to a large group of difficult to distinguish morphologically species, referred as the B. dorsalis complex. We report here a cytogenetic analysis of two laboratory strains of the species and provide a photographic polytene chromosome map from larval salivary glands. The mitotic complement consists of six chromosome pairs including a heteromorphic sex (XX/XY) chromosome pair. Analysis of the polytene complement has shown a total of five polytene chromosomes (10 polytene arms) that correspond to the five autosomes. The most important landmarks of each polytene chromosome and characteristic asynapsis at a specific chromosomal region are presented and discussed. Chromosomal homology between B. dorsalis and Ceratitis capitata has been determined by comparing chromosome banding patterns. The detection of chromosome inversions in both B. dorsalis strains is shown and discussed. Our results show that the polytene maps presented here are suitable for cytogenetic analysis of this species and can be used for comparative studies among species of the Tephritidae family. They also provide a diagnostic tool that could accelerate species identification within the B. dorsalis complex and could shed light on the ongoing speciation in this complex. Polytene chromosome maps can facilitate the development of biological control methods and support the genome mapping project of the species that is currently in progress.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available